gical learning into a purer and more Scriptural channel. It is not venturing too much to say, that the popular tendency of the theology of Germany, more especially among the theological students, is to unite with this party, and thus to find, in the investigation of the word of God, some resting place for the mind, and some food for the purer religious affections, which they could never find in the barren speculations of a Rationalistic faith.

When I represent, however, these two parties, as forming the whole school of Positive Theology, it is not to be supposed that their respective boundaries are very distinctly and definitely marked. There is, in fact, a considerable number of theologians, who are wavering between the two, and who, without giving up their attachments to the articles of the Lutheran church, are still pursuing a diligent and fruitful course of Biblical investigation. Of these, Hengstenberg, of Berlin, may be looked upon as one of the best examples. It is not either to be supposed, that all those who come actually under the denomination of Bible Theologians would be found at all identical in their theological creed. They have, it is true, this grand principle in common, which they hold in contradiction to that of Rationalism, namely, that the interpretation of the Scriptures is to be the great source of their religious faith, although the results to which their exegesis leads often present many shades of difference. Nitzsch of Bonn, for example, and Lücke of Göttingen, although both decidedly of this school, have a considerable leaning to the spirit and tone of Schleiermacher. Tholuck, again, although he has lately completely confined himself to the Bible Theology, shows yet in the spirit of his writings a manifest partiality to the moderate Calvinistic orthodoxy. And Neander, although he likewise is to be reckoned to the same party, has, nevertheless, already formed a particular school of his own, in which he has combined the study of church history with the interpretation of the Scriptures, as the data from which theological opinions are to be formed.

Neander is now greatly characterized by an almost passionate opposition to the Hegelian philosophy. During the lifetime of Schleiermacher he was in this respect much more easy, trusting that that veteran would watch its progress, and successfully oppose it on scientific grounds, wherever it might be necessary. Since Schleiermacher's death, however, he seems to have made it almost a matter of conscience to exert himself in the suppression of a party, of which he cannot conceive where it may lead to, and from which he augurs the very worst ; and his immense resources of learning, his attractive and devotional spirit, his unlimited benevolence, and unbounded popularity amongst his students, for whose welfare he almost seems to live, all render him a most efficient and formidable opponent.

To specify, however, any further of these various minor shades of opinion, would lead us too wide from our first intention of describing

merely the broader features of the present theological parties of Germany. What has been said may, perhaps, suffice for a rough, though, as far as it goes, I believe a correct sketch of the whole, and we shall only add further a word or two respecting the organs by which these different parties make known and defend their sentiments.

The Kantian Rationalism, which, as I have already mentioned, is spread to a considerable extent among the people at large, and among the Lutheran clergy in many parts of Germany, is represented by the "Rohr'sche Predigerbibliothek."

The Hegelian Rationalism, which numbers among its supporters the names of Marbeincke, Schulze, Gans, Michelet, and others, is supported by the "Zeitschrift der Speculativen Theologie," edited by Bauer; while the still more daring Rationalism of the New Hegelians has found a voice in the pages of what was formerly called the "Hall'sche Jahrbücher," but which is now published under the name of the "Deutsche Jahrbücher."

The Old Lutherans are regularly represented in the "Zeitschrift für die Gesammte Lutherishe Kirche" edited by Guericke and Rudelbach. The Bible Theology is supported in the "Studien und Kritiken" of Ullmann and Umbreit of Heidelberg; the party of Neander in “Reinwald's Repertorium," and the party wavering between the symbolic and Bible Theology, by Hengstenberg's "Evangelische Kirchenzeitung."

There may be other journals in the rich field of German theology, which are not here mentioned; but the above are at least the principal, and the most celebrated; and should any of your readers, Sir, feel disposed to look more closely into any of the theological parties whch have been designated, they would find a valuable store of information more particularly in the "Studien und Kritiken," which would amply repay them for the time that might be devoted to their perusal. Little Baddow.

J. D. MORELL.

ON BIBLICAL TRANSLATION.

On the expediency of revising the authorized version of the English Bible, the first number of the Congregational Magazine for this year contains a proposal by an able correspondent, which would probably have long since elicited some congenial remark, or practical result, had not a new edition of the common version in an improved form, and with many thousand emendations, been previously announced, and subsequently executed. For such an undertaking, the present period of religious zeal and activity, abounding in labourers and materials, and wherein the respective claims of divine revelation and human authority are warmly contested, is peculiarly favourable. At a time when the Scriptures have been translated into almost every known tongue, and

when great and laudable pains have been taken to perfect several of the foreign versions, it is most desirable that the English language, now so widely diffused, and so powerfully influential, should possess the best specimen of biblical translation which learning and piety can produce. In accordance with the general tenor of the essay already noticed, although not entirely with its spirit and details, the design of the following observations is to consider some of the principles which ought to regulate an improved English version of the Bible, and to suggest the means by which it might most effectually be accomplished. The writer agrees with his predecessor in recommending that the work should commence with a separate edition of the English New Testament, both on account of the superior importance and facility of the task, and because that portion of the Scripture is naturally distinct and complete. He agrees, also, that emendations of the original text sanctioned by competent judges should be admitted; and that the common version, which is in many respects excellent, should be carefully corrected, without attempting to make a translation absolutely new. That the dedication and some other appendages of that version should be excluded, and a strenuous effort made to abolish what remains of the Bible-printing monopoly, is implied in the very nature of the work; and on these subjects, already sufficiently discussed, no further arguments will here be introduced.

The following particulars in the plan above proposed appear, on the other hand, to be decidedly objectionable; namely, that the entire text of the authorized version, with the marginal readings, should be retained, and the projected improvements confined to foot-notes, and references; also, that the work should be undertaken by the Congregational Union, as a mode of increasing its pecuniary resources, and moral influence; and should be executed by a committee, after receiving the sanction of the whole body. In opposition to these views, it must be remembered, that the Congregational Union is not a consistory, or conclave, but a friendly conference of pastors and laymen, who assemble once or twice a year for the sole purpose of diffusing useful information, and Christian sentiment through the denomination to which they belong. If they confine themselves to these limits, they may, under the divine blessing, effect much good; but, should they transgress them, and assume powers and functions to which they have no claim, they will provoke opposition, injure the cause which they profess to serve, and insure their own dissolution. With a due regard to general taste and feeling, an improved version of the Scriptures, if attempted at all, should be freely and thoroughly executed. Its acceptance must depend, not on ecclesiastical authority, or party influence, but on its own intrinsic merit; and it should, therefore, be adapted for the perusal, not merely of Congregationalists, but of all who use the English language. Owing to obstacles arising from the state of the public mind which it is

unnecessary here to particularize, it cannot be expected that such a version, however excellent it might be, would in the first instance obtain complete success; and it must consequently be in a great measure devoted to the service of the rising, and of subsequent generations.

For the fulfilment of so valuable a design the following plan is suggested. Let an association of educated and evangelical Christians be formed for this express purpose, without distinction of country, sect, or party, provided, with the usual organization of presidents, secretaries, committees, &c., and holding occasional meetings for discussion. Let this society maintain a monthly, or quarterly journal, conducted by an able editor; and a select council, supplied with articles either by the members themselves or by others, but exclusively dedicated to the object in view. Through such a medium useful materials would be collected from all quarters; criticisms would be proposed, principles examined, rules established, and specimens exhibited. By such a system of co-operation many improvements would be secured, many errors avoided, and the religious community would become more interested in the undertaking, and better disposed to give it their countenance and support. When active preparations had thus been carried on for two or more years, let the society invite suitable persons, in conformity with rules and conditions previously determined, to present original versions either of the whole New Testament, or of particular portions of it; and, after submitting these versions to the revisal and correction of the editor and council, let them publish the volume at their own expense, with such remuneration to the respective authors as their services might deserve, and the funds of the society permit.

The

The rules and conditions prescribed for this purpose would, of course, require very careful consideration, but something like the following might be recommended. As the basis of an improved translation of the New Testament, the text of Griesbach and Scholz would, with some modifications, be adopted. The volume would be divided into four principal sections disposed in the usual order; namely, the Gospels the Acts of the Apostles, the Epistles, and the Apocalypse. several gospels and epistles would be arranged chronologically, according to the best evidence on that point now attainable; the former commencing with the Gospel by Luke, and the latter with the Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians, or perhaps with that to the Galatians. The Epistle at present assigned to the Ephesians, would be termed the Epistle to the Laodiceans. Each book would be divided into sections and paragraphs, according to the nature of its contents; the ordinary division into chapters and verses being merely indicated, for the convenience of reference, in the margin. The subdivision of all the books would be founded on a close and critical analysis, and that of the four gospels would be in accordance with a well-constructed harmony.

The leading principle of the version would be to represent the meaning and style of the original, as faithfully as possible, in a popular English form, such as might be generally acceptable and understood. A good translation is neither a paraphrase, nor a commentary; although, for the sake of perspicuity and impression, it may sometimes to a small extent assume the one or the other of those characters. Plain Saxon English, as at present spoken, should be preferred; and, with the exception of some expressions which are vulgar, pedantic, or obsolete, a large portion of the terms and phrases employed in the authorized version would be available for an improved one. Whilst, however, the style of biblical translation should be studiously adapted to the capacity of the humbler classes, who constitute the great majority of mankind, a low and degraded style should be equally avoided, and the popular mind should, by suitable instruction, be in some degree raised towards the dignity of the sacred originals. The natural tendency of revealed religion to promote universal education, which is thus and otherwise manifested, affords a strong evidence of its beneficent character, and divine origin. In the execution of this task, the Scriptures should be treated with profound, but not superstitious reverence. Nothing should be materially added, subtracted, or altered. There should be no sacrifice of sense to ornament, no attempt at amplification, suppression, or embellishment; to which, indeed, a somewhat bald and literal version, such as occurs in several parts of the original New Testament, would be far preferable. Many Greek and Hebrew idioms are happily either indigenous, or naturalized in the English language; but such as when exactly rendered appear uncouth, or scarcely intelligible, should be exchanged for the nearest corresponding native phrases, those words being in all cases considered the best which, under the given circumstances, best express the sense. A good translation must, however, be close as well as plain; and should therefore represent, as accurately as possible, not only the sense, but also the various modes and qualities of style employed in the original books. Amongst the modes of style, besides the distinction of poetry and prose, may be mentioned the narrative, dramatic, proverbial, argumentative, devotional, &c.; amongst the qualities of style, the simple, elevated, pathetic, desultory, elaborate, &c. The tone of mind and feeling evinced by the inspired authors, and their disposition in different cases either to express, or reserve their sentiments concerning the matters on which they treat, should likewise be carefully exhibited.

In reference to the minor details of biblical translation, a judicious use of particles may be noticed as highly important. Several of those which, although appropriate in Greek or Hebrew, would be unmeaning or superfluous in English, must be omitted; whilst, for the sake of emphasis and explanation, additional ones must occasionally be introduced. A critical attention to particles is chiefly requisite in the Epistles